[rduran1216]

---

agree with 4c?

What now?

[semeai]

5♦ exclusion keycard for hearts over 3♦ seems okay, if you play that. It seems difficult to extract much useful information otherwise

Added: 4♣ is also reasonable, of course. I think now it's between 5♦, stopping over 5♥, and just blasting 6♥. The latter is my choice, I think. I can't plan on bidding 5♦ and then correcting 5♥ to 6♥ because I may not be permitted to if partner takes too long to decide over 5♦. Possibly I could bid 6♦ instead, which likely shows this sort of hand.

[Cyberyeti]

semeai, on 2011-July-12, 10:42, said:

5♦ exclusion keycard for hearts over 3♦ seems okay, if you play that. It seems difficult to extract much useful information otherwise

Added: 4♣ is also reasonable, of course. I think now it's between 5♦, stopping over 5♥, and just blasting 6♥. The latter is my choice, I think. I can't plan on bidding 5♦ and then correcting 5♥ to 6♥ because I may not be permitted to if partner takes too long to decide over 5♦. Possibly I could bid 6♦ instead, which likely shows this sort of hand.

I think you can bid 5♦ and move over a slow 5♥ with 5♠, basically you're planning to bid 6♦ over 6♣ which hopefully will tell partner to look at his hearts to see if he wants to bid 7. You need no more than xxx, KQ10xx, xxx, AJ for this to be on neither curly suit 5-0.

But yes 5♦ exclusion straight up is the bid.

[matmat]

Cyberyeti, on 2011-July-12, 11:19, said:

But yes 5♦ exclusion straight up is the bid.

Because non-jumps to the 5 level are obviously exclusion.

Not to mention, that if it is exclusion, it may get you too high opposite 0 keys, if you happen to be playing 1430 in this situation, say KQx, QTxxx, AJx, xx. Yeah, it's a little contrived, but hardly impossible -- partner's 4H call was forced, remember? Even if p does have the ♥K, our trump in dummy may get tapped and we won't be able to pick up the suit if there is the anticipated bad break, losing the ♣A as well, possibly.

I think I'd just go with 4♠, i don't see why jumping to 5♦ leaving p no room to show a ♣ control is at all popular.

[semeai]

matmat, on 2011-July-12, 11:39, said:

Because non-jumps to the 5 level are obviously exclusion.

This was as an alternative to 4♣.

Quote

Not to mention, that if it is exclusion, it may get you too high opposite 0 keys, if you happen to be playing 1430 in this situation, say KQx, QTxxx, AJx, xx. Yeah, it's a little contrived, but hardly impossible -- partner's 4H call was forced, remember? Even if p does have the ♥K, our trump in dummy may get tapped and we won't be able to pick up the suit if there is the anticipated bad break, losing the ♣A as well, possibly.

Responses to exclusion shouldn't be 1430. Stopping intelligently when partner has no keys outside diamonds was one reason I chose it.

Quote

I think I'd just go with 4♠, i don't see why jumping to 5♦ leaving p no room to show a ♣ control is at all popular.

If this is a cue, it is nice to be able to learn about a ♣A, but partner may also tell us about a singleton club. I don't see enough of a benefit over, say, 5♦ (not exclusion here!) that I'd be willing to risk it being taken as natural.

Does anyone have a good general rule they play here that covers the 4♠ bid as a cue or natural?

[mtvesuvius]

I like 5♦ directly, since I just don't think I am going to get the information that I need from any other calls, and my later bidding may be tougher after 4♣ or 4♦, as is the case here.

Given that I bid 4♣, which is not unreasonable, I'd like to try 4♠ now but I'm not so sure if it is a cuebid or still looking for the best game with a two or three card black-suit discrepancy (4117 or something -- Would that double 3♦ or bid 4♣?). If I think partner will read 4♠, then I'll try it... Otherwise I guess I would try Keycard and hope for the best. Over 4♠ if partner can't keycard or cuebid at this point, I think I let them play in 5♥.

This is a tough problem IMO... Maybe I'll just sit there and wait until it goes away.

[gnasher]

If I wanted to be able to play in 4♠, I would have made a negative double. Hence 4♠ is definitely a cue-bid, but it's ambiguous about the trump suit.

[rduran1216]

is anyone tempted to start with a negative double?

[cherdano]

rduran1216, on 2011-July-12, 13:58, said:

is anyone tempted to start with a negative double?

Nooooooooooooooo!

[mtvesuvius]

rduran1216, on 2011-July-12, 13:58, said:

is anyone tempted to start with a negative double?

No way, but it seems Lurpoa is!

[Cyberyeti]

Quote

I think you can bid 5♦ and move over a slow 5♥ with 5♠, basically you're planning to bid 6♦ over 6♣ which hopefully will tell partner to look at his hearts to see if he wants to bid 7. You need no more than xxx, KQ10xx, xxx, AJ for this to be on neither curly suit 5-0.

But yes 5♦ exclusion straight up is the bid

matmat, on 2011-July-12, 11:39, said:

Because non-jumps to the 5 level are obviously exclusion.

As a subsequent poster pointed out, you missed the words "straight up" on my last line ie first time instead of 4♣. 5♦ is clearly a cue over 4♥ and I discussed where it should go from there.

I play 03/14 exclusion so don't have the stopping problem, but I don't think partner will have 0, I'd lay very good money on him having 2 or 3 of ♥KQ and ♣A.

[matmat]

Cyberyeti, on 2011-July-12, 14:58, said:

As a subsequent poster pointed out, you missed the words "straight up" on my last line ie first time instead of 4♣. 5♦ is clearly a cue over 4♥ and I discussed where it should go from there.

I play 03/14 exclusion so don't have the stopping problem, but I don't think partner will have 0, I'd lay very good money on him having 2 or 3 of ♥KQ and ♣A.

You're both right, I did miss it.

I still don't like exclusion here and am quite OK with 4C. I also think that 4S should be a cue for hearts.

[Cyberyeti]

matmat, on 2011-July-12, 15:16, said:

You're both right, I did miss it.

I still don't like exclusion here and am quite OK with 4C. I also think that 4S should be a cue for hearts.

4♠ over 4♥ is either a cue or kickback depending on agreement, with 4N being the other. Quite what you do with 5-7 in the blacks is not clear

[MrAce]

4♣ was asking for trouble imo and even when LHO did not give you the trouble u asked for, u seem to be still unsure what to do now...You had a great hand when pd opened 1♥ and when RHO bid 3♦ u have a greater hand now knowing pd can not be full of ♦ hcps...All u need is ♣ A ♥KQ for grand and there is one way to learn it. (I am aware if pd has Axx(x) ♣ AK ♦ and Qxxxx or xxxxxx ♥ then we can go down in 5-6♥ when we can make 6♣)

I'd just bid 5♦ instead of 4♣ and learn what i need most. I know it aint perfect but what is perfect after they preempted anyway ?

[Onedown]

rduran1216, on 2011-July-12, 13:58, said:

is anyone tempted to start with a negative double?

Finally after how many replies someone said the sane bid. We may want to play in X ♠. Any other bid we make is going to lose us the opportunity. The ONLY thing I don't know is who is VUL? It could go neg x all pass and only if white vs red would I feel comfortable.

[Cyberyeti]

Onedown, on 2011-July-13, 00:38, said:

Finally after how many replies someone said the sane bid. We may want to play in X ♠. Any other bid we make is going to lose us the opportunity. The ONLY thing I don't know is who is VUL? It could go neg x all pass and only if white vs red would I feel comfortable.

It says white/white (the bar across the top with the compass points can be red), but does partner never pass this double with xx, KQ10xx, K1098, AJ where you're collecting less than a fortune against a cold grand.

[JLOGIC]

Wow, 4S shows 5 spades and 6 clubs to me and thought that would be normal.

[cherdano]

Onedown, on 2011-July-13, 00:38, said:

Finally after how many replies someone said the sane bid. We may want to play in X ♠. Any other bid we make is going to lose us the opportunity. The ONLY thing I don't know is who is VUL? It could go neg x all pass and only if white vs red would I feel comfortable.

We may also want to play in clubs. To say it differently, you are choosing to deny your fit (for now), and to ignore your 6-card club suit, in order to find a 4-4 spade fit. While risking a disaster when partner passes.

[whereagles]

I think I would have bid 5♦ the round before. That's certainly exclusion RKCB.

Now I'm not risking a mix-up as to what 5♦ might mean, so I'll just bid 6♥.

[Free]

I hope you didn't bid 4♣ as Gerber, and I also hope partner didn't interpret 4♣ as Gerber...

I would've just bid 5♦ exclusion, it gives us the information we need.